Women Combat Roles

WI agree with the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s allowance of women to be in combat position. I find it a little sexist that women were denied the chance to not have combat roles. In the article, â€Å"Pentagon Removes Ban on Women in Combat† by Ernesto Londono of The Washington Post, it says, â€Å"Panetta announced a lifting of the ban on female service members in combat roles, a watershed policy change that was informed by women’s valor in Iraq and Afghanistan and that removes the remaining barrier to a fully inclusive military. † I think that women are just as capable as men.Even if their bodies aren’t built as strong and men, they have determination and can do so many things, even better than some men. The army currently excludes women from about 25 percent of active-duty roles. The article says that, â€Å"The decision comes after a decade of counterinsurgency missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, where women demonstrated heroism on battlefields with no front lines. † To me this is proving the point that women are just as capable with men. Women are just as much as heroes as men are and just as inspiring, if not more.The Army and the marines are going to present their plans to open most jobs to women by May 15. I really think that this is an excellent idea. As the article says, it’s â€Å"monumental. † I absolutely agree. â€Å"Every time equality is recognized and meritocracy is enforced, it helps everyone, and it will help professionalize the force. † I agree that the force will be more professional with women in combat roles and not just men. Of course this announcement has created a lot of critics and lots of skeptics.The article says, â€Å"Critics of opening combat positions to women have argued for years that integration during deployments could create a distracting, sexually charged atmosphere in the force that women are unable to perform some of the more physically demanding jobs. † I say that is sexist. Women are emotionally and physically strong. They may not be able to bench press the amount that men can but they can do a whole lot and the combat roles would be very lucky to have them. If they want to dedicate their time/life to the military then let them.In the article it says, â€Å"Lifting the ban will go a long way toward changing the culture of a male dominated institution in which women have long complained about discrimination and a high incidence of sexual assault. † I think throughout history, women’s rights have been a serious issue. If they let women fight on combat roles, it would do wonders that would go down in history. Another thing the article says is, â€Å"’I’ve served with women at all levels, and based on my experience, women have done a phenomenal job,’ said the officer. Women are phenomenal, I agree. They can do amazing things, just as much as men. It’s important that the military doesn’t low er their standards of what’s acceptable and not and they address this in the article when they say, â€Å"It is critical that we maintain the same high standards that have made the American military the most feared and admired fighting force in the world. † I think that women can reach these high standards and perform them just as well. I agree with the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s position to allow women in have a role in combat positions.